This is like the leaders of the House and the Governor agreeing to sell you a car for $1000 and then bickering about how much to raise the price on you afterward. In any case, you (the Vikings) are going to go buy the car from the guy in LA who isn't dicking you around.

Except that person doesn't exist, because the NFL uses LA as a boogeyman to scare the other 32 cities to fall in line.

I really don't want the Vikings to stay, but you're presuming far too much here. There's a reason the Vikings haven't threatened a move; they really don't want to.

Also, people are really presuming a lot if they think most Minnesotans would miss the Vikings all that much. Minnesota isn't like a lot of other midwestern states; football is only one of many sports that people like, and the Vikings are barely more popular in the metro than the Packers are.

I lived in Cleveland when the Browns moved. This is NOTHING like that. Clevelanders identified with the Browns on a personal level as if they were dying. Most Minnesotans will shrug and then go do something else.

Except that person doesn't exist, because the NFL uses LA as a boogeyman to scare the other 32 cities to fall in line.

I agree. You can't as get much leverage against current NFL cities if the next best options are San Antonio, Toronto, Mexico City, London, Minneapolis, or Oklahoma City (and Mexico City and London are pipe-dreams). LA gives them leverage.

I don't think the NFL would oppose a team moving to LA, but I don't think they mind not having a team in LA.

They don't have to agree on the same amount, just a different, compromised one. The senate just agreed on a 25 million dollar increase for the Vikings. It's up to the committee to come up with a compromised amount acceptable to both. Is 75 million a pretty big difference? Sure, but that's the point of conference committees, to iron out differences. It's not the done deal you're making it seem to be. You're the only one saying that, and it's the opposite of what the actual experts are saying.

It doesn't matter if the conference committee goes for the low figure and says 25 million more than what the NFL agreed to. The house still has to pass it again afterward, and they barely passed it the first time with 105 million tacked on.

Even if it miraculously gets through with the Vikes paying 25 mil more than they originally agreed to pay...why would they? They were doing that no-ticket-buying fanbase a favor by agreeing to the terms they had in the first place. Why bend over backwards to keep the team there when they have trouble selling out home games?

This thing still has to get out of a conference with the Senate and House leaders agreeing to a new sum, then agreeing to even allow it to go to vote again, then has to get through the full voting bodies of both houses, then has to get through the Vikings and NFL, who've already said they don't want to pay any more than they already agreed to.

...and what "experts?" Every schoolkid knows how the legislature works. The only "experts" are the Vikings since they have the final say, and they just said they're not cool with paying more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51

Except that person doesn't exist, because the NFL uses LA as a boogeyman to scare the other 32 cities to fall in line.

I really don't want the Vikings to stay, but you're presuming far too much here. There's a reason the Vikings haven't threatened a move; they really don't want to.

That person definitely exists. There are people who have already spent millions of dollars just for the chance to be considered to move a team there. They've offered to put a billion toward a stadium in exchange for the opportunity to buy a minority share of a team.

...and what "experts?" Every schoolkid knows how the legislature works. The only "experts" are the Vikings since they have the final say, and they just said they're not cool with paying more.

You know, the ones who follow and write about this story for a living? Who know how congress is likely to work out and get paid to make accurate assessments of the situation? People who I'm much more likely to trust the opinion of than a random rival fan on the internet.

Not a single one of them has expressed even the slightest thought that the Vikings are 100% leaving. I've been pessimistic about this situation since the beginning, I wouldn't put a dime on the Vikings staying, but there is no clear answer right now and the fact that you think there is is strange. You're claiming that basically you know something that no one else does, even including everyone closely involved in the situation which makes no sense.

You know, the ones who follow and write about this story for a living? Who know how congress is likely to work out and get paid to make accurate assessments of the situation? People who I'm much more likely to trust the opinion of than a random rival fan on the internet.

They don't know any more about the legislature than anyone who paid attention in poli sci 101. C'mon now. Everything I outlined there has to be done. That's just how it is. Me being a rival fan doesn't mean that I'm making up the fact that the exact same people who a couple of days ago barely managed to pass the bill with 105 million extra coming from the Vikings will somehow have to pass it again with less coming from the Vikings. IF this thing gets out of committee, both houses have to vote on it all over again. I'm not making up the goddamned legislative process. It's fact.

If they could barely agree to pay 293,000,000 out of state funds, what makes you think they'd agree to even the Senate's better willingness to pay 373,000,000? What makes you think that the Vikings, after months of negotiating with house leaders and the governor to come to an agreement for the state to pay 398,000,000, are about to agree to pay a big chunk of change more, which even the Senate's 25,000,000 represents?

...and for the record, I don't want the Vikings to leave. I want them to get a nice shiny new stadium and stay in Minny and the NFC North forever. I like our division the way it is. Every team's home is within driving distance for me, so I can see the Bears on the road a lot. I'm just a realist who recognizes a legislature trying just hard enough to cover its own ass when I see it.

They don't know any more about the legislature than anyone who paid attention in poli sci 101. C'mon now. Everything I outlined there has to be done. That's just how it is. Me being a rival fan doesn't mean that I'm making up the fact that the exact same people who a couple of days ago barely managed to pass the bill with 105 million extra coming from the Vikings will somehow have to pass it again with less coming from the Vikings. IF this thing gets out of committee, both houses have to vote on it all over again. I'm not making up the goddamned legislative process. It's fact.

If they could barely agree to pay 293,000,000 out of state funds, what makes you think they'd agree to even the Senate's better willingness to pay 373,000,000? What makes you think that the Vikings, after months of negotiating with house leaders and the governor to come to an agreement for the state to pay 398,000,000, are about to agree to pay a big chunk of change more, which even the Senate's 25,000,000 represents?

...and for the record, I don't want the Vikings to leave. I want them to get a nice shiny new stadium and stay in Minny and the NFC North forever. I like our division the way it is. Every team's home is within driving distance for me, so I can see the Bears on the road a lot. I'm just a realist who recognizes a legislature trying just hard enough to cover its own ass when I see it.

Please stop re-explaining the process to me, I know the process. I'm actually a political science student. Am I looking at this with a glass-half full perspective? Maybe, but I've been a Vikings fan for 21 years what do you expect? Would it be somewhat surprising if it passed through the house after an increase in public funding? Sure, but the point is there's still a conceivable chance there is a magic number somewhere in the middle that can be agreed upon.

What really is the bigger obstacle is that the senate passed an amendment requiring a public referendum, and as bf has stated multiple times the twin cities don't care about the Vikings, comparatively to the rest of the country at least.

Final version of the bill got out of the conference committee, Vikes agreed to the 50 million dollar increase, and it passed the house this morning. Wow, its almost like they were never a sure thing to move after all.

__________________
"Compadres, it is imperative that we crush the freedom fighters before the start of the rainy season. And remember, a shiny new donkey for whomever brings me the head of Colonel Montoya."

The Vikings are staying in Minnesota and a new $975m stadium should be completed by 2016.

The state Senate approved the deal on Thursday night having already been passed earlier by the House and now only needs a signature from the Minnesota governor to become official. Gov. Mark Dayton has already said he'll sign the measure, meaning last night's 36-30 Senate vote in favour of a new stadium was effectively the final hurdle.

The Vikings had to pledge $50 million more to close the deal. They will put $477 million toward the project, the state has pledged $348 million and the city of Minneapolis will chip in $150 million. Under the the terms of the deal the Vikings will sign a new 30-year lease on a stadium to be built on the site of the Metrodome.

"The Stadium Bill just passed the Minnesota Senate. The only thing left to do is have the Governor sign it!" the Vikings Twitter account said.

Vikings vice president Lester Bagley hugged another team official when the news happened and shouted, "Let's build it!" Bagley has been pushing for this moment for more than a decade. So has Vikings owner Zygi Wilf. Longtime Vikings beat reporter Kevin Seifert, now with ESPN.com, says that Wilf "saved the franchise."

I tend to agree that at this point the Raiders and the Chargers are going to be the two most obvious targets, and probably the ones that would please the league the most, as neither would cause a huge disruption in the league.

People frequently mention the Rams, but their dome is only 17 years old. Unless the city has an awful lease with the Rams, I don't see how they could get out of it for at least another 3-5 years.

The issue is not how old the dome is but if it is what considered to be a "first tier" NFL stadium. The language in the lease with the Rams and the CVC (management company for the Jones Dome) requires that the stadium be kept up to certain standards.

The Rams' lease requires the St. Louis stadium authority to provide a first-tier facility by 2015. The Edward Jones Dome is not close to first tier by NFL standards. It's debatable whether a re-design could meet the Rams' likely demands without the project becoming cost-prohibitive.

In the meantime, the Rams have recently rejected the stadium authority's offer (their list of possible improvements) as a matter of course. The stadium authority is expected to reject the Rams' counter proposal which includes a retractable roof among other goodies. Once that happens, an arbitrator will begin deciding what constitutes a reasonable upgrade. That process, scheduled to begin June 15 and conclude before 2013, would produce a compromise proposal for the city to accept or reject.

If the city accepts, the Rams would be bound to the proposal, keeping in place their lease through 2025. If the city rejects the arbitrator's proposal, the Rams would be free to consider their options in St. Louis or elsewhere starting in the 2015 season.

The Rams and the city of St. Louis are in uncharted waters. Nobody knows how the arbitration process will play out and what the consequences of all this will mean.

Finally, our new owner, Stan Kroenke, has been quite silent and is keeping his cards close to his vest. Many wonder if one of those cards includes the move to LA one.